Topic: is it true that...

[6pairsofshoes]

True. But there are a shitpotload of African women that advocate it. Be careful, this could become a race issue, and then it will become compulsory!

Americans advocating something doesn't stop it being mutilation, does it?

1)  Many of the African women advocating the practice are muslim, although I don't think all of them are.  I see them as women, not members of a social construct (I don't really think race exists, biologically).

2)  I mention the U.S. because I had the impression that this thread was somehow linked to American practices. I thought it was you who had introduced the subject into the thread.  Genital mutilation is just that regardless of geography.

[goldshirt*9]

  there there there.Its not always about Christ.

[6pairsofshoes]

ohcheap1 introduced the topic of nationality by referring to the fact that she's American.  chrisT responded with a general observation about Americans tendency toward cosmetic surgery on their children's genitals or something to that effect.

In my normal sleep deprived state the whole business melded together.  But I think that chrisT and I basically agree on most of these points.

There is a thriving cosmetic surgery business in the U.S. that is aimed at enhancing women's genitals, to make them more attractive and functionally perfect.  This is another field of practice entirely, but it's more in keeping with chrisT's original observation, although it has nothing to do with children.  My various e-mail boxes regularly receive offers to enlarge the male member that they suspect I have.  So it's a practice that applies to both genders. 

Occasionally, as in the case of actress Jamie Lee Curtis, there are children born with varying degrees of hermaphroditism that require corrective surgery.  My understanding is that in most cases, surgeons tend to correct to the female side, probably because of the relative ease of the procedure.

[SACPOP]

While in the context of this discussion the word mutilate could be defended as correct in its most semantic, literal sense, the word mutilate also carries with it a malicious connotation, thus the use of the phrase "child mutilation" w/r/t the process of male circumcision carries implications of inherently malicious intent.

[6pairsofshoes]

@chrisT, thanks for the clarification.  I knew I'd managed to get the sense of it screwed up somewhere along the line.  Mutilation is in the eyes of the beholder, but I assume we have evolved in our present forms because things have a purpose and suit that purpose well, otherwise we'd be dead.  Medicine attempts to "correct" nature and to address its shortcomings.  Sometimes what it does is cockeyed, however noble its intentions.

There's also a series of odd surgical practices performed on animals, mostly dogs, where they cut or crimp tails to a mere nub and clip ears.  I've never understood this, either.

[8ullfrog]

This is a really bless'ed weird derail. I wish I had something to steer the thread back on course, it was interesting.

[6pairsofshoes]

The title of this thread is "is it true that"

The first offered topic was about toilet paper.  That subject appeared to have been exhausted when ohcheap1 interjected a brief news article about the new Prince, which generated subsequent discussion.  That's hardly a derail, unless you think the entire thread should be devoted to a discussion of bath tissue.

[SACPOP]

As it's been presented to me, male circumcision is performed in the interest of health and cleanliness, while female circumcision is intended deprive the female of sexual pleasure and subjugate the female sex drive.

If those are in fact the true reasons behind the separate acts, I can easily understand the belief that male circumcision is acceptable and not malicious, while female circumcision is unacceptable and malicious.

[brickbatz]

I like the thick toilet paper.

[8ullfrog]

I thought the thread was about answering questions about cultural context / a place of knowledge.

Such as "Is it true that opossums are an abomination?" to which the answer is "Of course they are, and cars are the cure."

Oh, I've got one! Why the golly do the british call Top Ramen "Pot noodles"?

[6pairsofshoes]

Me too.

But, in the face of received wisdom, Wikipedia (the ultimate expert in all things) says:

(My emphasis)

... and:

Only one of the five appears to sort-of-fit with "subjugation of the female sex drive".

Wikipedia?
Depends on whether you like having sex with a female partner who is capable of achieving orgasm.  If it's not important, then removing the clitoris is not a big deal, at least to the only people who appear to matter, men.  Being sexual seems to be an essential part of a healthy organism.  Removing the capability to experience that fully seems to have only one end:  stunting the organism.  I don't care if you are discussing slime moulds or women.  The end result is the same.  This, to me, is against nature.  Cutting parts of people off is a bad idea, unless you have a ruptured appendix or some kind of malignant tumor.  Those are pathological and should require medical intervention.  Cutting off healthy body parts seems contrary to the Hippocratic Oath.

And while I love thick toilet tissue, it does pose a problem with some septic systems.

[8ullfrog]

Makes more sense than any other definition I've heard.

Always figured Top Ramen was a brand thing, like "Best Noodles" since ramen is a type of noodles.

Prefer Yakisoba anyway.

Thank you for answering my question.

[6pairsofshoes]

They are noodles, and they are in a pot.

What has that to do with "Top", or "Ramen"?

(Is ramen the plural of male sheep?)

That sounds a very male point of view.

I wonder if the biggest problem is when women appear to be complicit in their "subjugation", and that is mildly irritating.

I don't believe that slime molds have sex. Nor do I think that they have orgasms. But I totally agree with the underlying principle.

Even thin toilet tissue can't be flushed in Malta.

If women weren't complicit, I don't think this practice would continue.  That's the most disturbing aspect of it, I think.

I've never been to Malta, but I believe William S. Burroughs liked to hang out there as it figures prominently in some of his novels.  Is it true that Malta and Yalta are in the same area?

[SACPOP]

Kinda like Canada and Granada?

[mishca09]

is it true that ikea furniture  is made in sweden ?